Editorial | The EC’s press meet dodged the core questions on “vote theft”
The Election Commission of India called a press conference to quieten the storm over “vote theft.” Instead of clarity, we got a combative ultimatum, selective talking points, and very little data that can actually reassure voters. In a moment when public trust is fragile, the EC chose to lecture and warn, not to explain and prove.
This row did not start with a rally or a TV debate. It began with Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) where 65 lakh names were reportedly deleted in the draft rolls. The Supreme Court had to step in and direct the EC to publish details of the deletions with reasons on district websites. Only after that order did Bihar’s CEO upload the list, and the EC publicly emphasised how quickly it complied. This timeline matters because it shows transparency came after judicial nudging, not before. That does not build confidence.
What the EC said — and what it didn’t
At the presser, the Chief Election Commissioner gave Rahul Gandhi seven days to either file a sworn affidavit with evidence or apologise to the nation. He also argued that “vote theft cannot happen” at the machine because a person can press the button only once, and stressed that roll preparation and voting are separate processes. These lines made headlines. But they also skirted the heart of the dispute: alleged large-scale, wrongful deletions and additions in the rolls ahead of a crucial state election.
The Commission explained away anomalies like “house number 0” and duplicate names as address-formatting or record-cleaning issues, and insisted the SIR is not a rush job. What it did not share was granular, verifiable evidence that wrongful deletions have been promptly corrected or that inclusion barriers are low for poor, migrant and first-time voters.
Why the press meet failed to convince
1) It fought a straw man
The EC focused on EVM tampering and “one person, one vote,” while the main charge is voter suppression via the rolls. Conflating machine integrity with roll integrity avoids the central pain point: who got cut, on what grounds, and how fast are they being restored.
2) Transparency arrived late, not early
Publishing reasons for deletions after a Supreme Court directive is good, but reactive. People want to see proactive disclosure: district-wise reason codes, ward/booth heatmaps of deletions, and a running correction log that shows how many names were restored after objections. The EC showcased speed of compliance (uploaded “within 56 hours”), not depth of transparency.
3) The burden of proof was pushed on citizens
A seven-day affidavit demand to a political opponent is theatre, not governance. The legal and moral burden sits with the authority controlling the rolls. If the EC believes the SIR is clean, it should publish audit trails, independent verification reports, and error rates by category (death, shift, duplication, “dead but alive” cases discovered and fixed). A podium warning cannot substitute for public evidence.
4) Too many tough questions went unanswered
Reporters flagged holes; the Commission largely sidestepped them. Simple queries remain: What is the false-positive deletion rate in the draft? What share of objections filed were accepted? How many deletions were reversed within the window? Without these figures, the presser looked defensive. Even business media called out the dodges.
5) The human stories cut through the spin
In the Supreme Court, “dead” voters walked in alive. Their testimony about the documents demanded to re-enter the rolls underscored how the costs of correction fall on the weakest. If deletion is easy and restoration is hard, the system is tilted. The EC did not convincingly address this asymmetry.
The trust deficit is now political capital
Opposition parties have turned the trust gap into street and parliamentary pressure — joint pressers, protest marches, even talk of an impeachment motion. You can disagree with their politics, but the scale of mobilisation shows how little the presser calmed the waters. When the referee is the story, the game is already in trouble.
What the EC should have done — and still can Publish the full diagnostics, not just a list
Release district-level dashboards showing reasons for each deletion, acceptance/rejection rates of objections, and time taken to restore names. Add a weekly errata log until final rolls close.
Independent audit, publicly presented
Commission a third-party audit (retired constitutional judges, CAG-grade auditors, and statisticians) of a representative sample of deletions and additions. Present the findings in an open hearing.
Lower the barrier to get back on the roll
If eleven documents are accepted under the SIR framework, ensure BLOs help citizens generate at least one low-friction proof on the spot. Mobile camps in bastis and panchayats should process restorations within days, not weeks.
Name-and-notify policy for the “declared dead”
When a person is marked deceased, the system should auto-trigger door-to-door verification and a public notice period before deletion. Where mistakes are found, the EC must publicly count and correct them.
Stop the optics, start the evidence
Ditch ultimatums to politicians. Hold a data briefing every 72 hours till September 1 with hard numbers, district comparatives, and case studies of corrected errors — not just assertions.
The bottom line
Here’s the thing: confidence in elections is built on boring paperwork that stands up to scrutiny. The EC’s press conference was heavy on rhetoric and light on proof. It answered charges of “vote theft” with moral outrage and legalese, not with the granular facts people needed. Until the Commission puts out verifiable, district-level evidence and shows that wrongful deletions are being fixed fast and fairly many citizens will remain unconvinced. An institution of this stature should not be asking for trust. It should be earning it, line by line, name by name.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Lost a good friend; void cannot be filled: Fadnavis mourns Ajit Pawar’s passing
Mumbai (PTI): Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Wednesday described Deputy CM Ajit Pawar’s tragic death in a plane crash as unbelievable, and said he had lost a good friend.
Fadnavis said “today” (January 28) will be a government holiday and there will be a three-day state mourning as a mark of respect to Pawar.
Ajit Pawar’s death has left a void that will never be filled, he said. “After working closely together, it is unbelievable that he is no more,” Fadnavis said.
Talking to reporters, Fadnavis described Pawar as a people’s leader who knew the state well and had a deep understanding of the issues in Maharashtra. He said it takes several years to build and establish such leadership.
Fadnavis said he had apprised Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah about the tragedy. The CM said he had also spoken with Ajit Pawar’s cousin Supriya Sule and his son Parth Pawar.
“Both (Deputy CM) Eknath Shinde and I are leaving for Baramati now. Once their entire family gathers in Baramati, we will share further details,” he said.
The entire state stands by Pawar’s family and his party NCP in this hour of grief, he added.
Ajit Pawar, 66, and four other persons were killed after an aircraft carrying them crashed in Maharashtra’s Pune district on Wednesday morning, officials said. The incident occurred when the plane carrying Pawar and others landed near Baramati, they said.
Several state BJP leaders, including Ashish Shelar, Ravindra Chavan and Chandrashekhar Bawankule, expressed deep grief over Pawar’s passing.
“This heart-wrenching incident has left the mind numb. Maharashtra has lost an experienced, dutiful and resolute leader,” state minister Shelar said.
Pawar left a distinct imprint on the state’s politics through his strong grip over administration, decisiveness and relentless drive for Maharashtra’s all-round progress. “Firmness, discipline, punctuality and tireless dedication were defining aspects of his personality,” he said.
BJP state president Ravindra Chavan said Maharashtra’s politics was unimaginable without Pawar. He said Pawar was known as a dynamic leader with a powerful command over administration and an unwavering focus on the state’s comprehensive development.
He said Pawar held the record for serving the longest tenure as deputy CM in the state’s history and left an indelible mark while handling key portfolios such as irrigation, energy and finance. “With his passing, Maharashtra has lost a firm, disciplined, punctual and indefatigable leader. This void can never be filled,” Chavan said.
Revenue Minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule described Pawar as a senior friend and guide. “Even now, it is difficult to accept that this tragedy has really happened,” he said. Pawar would be remembered as a true people’s leader who gave clear direction and unstoppable momentum to Maharashtra’s all-round development, Bawankule said.
Recalling Pawar’s immense administrative experience, Bawankule said he had personally sought the NCP leader’s advice on several occasions.
“The loss of Ajitdada is not merely the departure of one leader; it is a profound loss for Maharashtra itself. The nation has lost a visionary statesman, and I have lost a dear elder friend and guide,” Bawankule said, adding that the reality of Pawar no longer being among them felt impossible to accept.
VIDEO | Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis expresses grief over the demise of Deputy CM Ajit Pawar in an aircraft crash. He says, “This morning, a very tragic incident occurred. In extremely unforeseen circumstances, the news of the unfortunate demise of our state’s deputy chief… pic.twitter.com/sKIKJ5FvRW
— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) January 28, 2026
